Green Party 2004 Platform on Economics


A. Ecological Economics

1. We call for an economic system that is based on a combination of private businesses, decentralized democratic cooperatives, publicly owned enterprises, and alternative economic structures. Collectively, this system puts human and ecological needs alongside profits to measure success, and maintains accountability to communities.

2. Community-based economics constitutes an alternative to both corporate capitalism and state socialism. It values diversity and decentralization.

Recognition of limits is central to this system. The drive to accumulate power and wealth is a pernicious characteristic of a civilization headed in a pathological direction. Greens advocate that economic relations become more direct, more cooperative, and more egalitarian.

Humanizing economic relations is just one aspect of our broader objective: to shift toward a different way of life characterized by sustainability, regionalization, more harmonious balance between the natural ecosphere and the human-made technosphere, and revival of community life. Our perspective is antithetical to both Big Business and Big Government.

3. Greens support a major redesign of commerce. We endorse true cost pricing. We support production methods that eliminates waste. In natural systems, everything is a meal for something else. Everything recycles, there is no waste. We need to mimic natural systems in the way we manufacture and produce things. Consumables need to be designed to be thrown into a compost heap and/or eaten. Durable goods would be designed in closed-loop systems, ultimately to be disassembled and reassembled. Toxics would be safeguarded, minimally produced, secured, and would ideally have markers identifying them in perpetuity with their makers.

4. Sustaining our quality of life, economic prosperity, environmental health, and long-term survival demands that we adopt new ways of doing business. We need to remake commerce to encourage diversity and variety, responding to the enormous complexity of global and local conditions. Big business is not about appropriateness and adaptability, but about power and market control. Greens support small business, responsible stakeholder capitalism, and broad and diverse forms of economic cooperation. We argue that economic diversity is more responsive than big business to the needs of diverse human populations.

5. Greens view the economy as a part of the ecosystem, not as an isolated subset in which nothing but resources come in and products and waste go out. There is a fundamental conflict between economic growth and environmental protection. There is an absolute limit to economic growth based on laws of thermodynamics and principles of ecology. Long before that limit is reached, an optimum size of the economy is reached which maximizes human welfare in an holistic sense.

6. We support a Superfund for Workers program as envisioned by the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers Union in 1991. Such a program would guarantee full income and benefits for all workers displaced by ecological conversion until they find new jobs with comparable income and benefits.

7. The Green Party supports methods, such as the Index of Social Health Indicators, the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare, and the Genuine Progress Indicator, that take into account statistics on housing, income, and nutrition.


B. Measuring Economic Progress

1. Economic growth, as gauged by increasing Gross Domestic Product (GDP), is a dangerous and anachronistic American goal. The most viable and sustainable alternative is a steady-state economy. A steady-state economy has a stable or mildly fluctuating product of population and per capita consumption, and is generally indicated by stable or mildly fluctuating GDP. The steady-state economy has become a more appropriate goal than economic growth in the United States and other large, wealthy economies. A steady-state economy precludes ever-expanding production and consumption of goods and services. However, a steady-state economy does not preclude economic development - a qualitative process not gauged by GDP growth and other measures that overlook ecological effects.

2. One way to measure the economy is to assess the value of non-monetary goods and services and measure the rate of infant mortality, life expectancy of people, educational opportunities offered by the state, family stability, environmental data, and health care for all people. Another measure is to quantify human benefit (in terms of education, health care, elder care, etc.) provided by each unit of output. Measuring the gap between the most fortunate and the least fortunate in our society, for example, tells us how well or poorly we are doing in creating an economy that does not benefit some at the expense of others.

3. For many nations with widespread poverty, increasing per capita consumption (through economic growth or through more equitable distributions of wealth) remains an appropriate goal. Ultimately, however, the global ecosystem will not be able to support further economic growth. Therefore, an equitable distribution of wealth among nations is required to maintain a global steady-state economy. A global economy with inequitable wealth distribution will be subject to continual international strife and conflict. Such strife and conflict, in turn, ensures the economic unsustainability of some nations and threatens the economic sustainability of all.


C. Citizen Control Over Corporations

1. The federal government doles out billions in subsidies and tax breaks to corporate special interests. The current level of influence now being exerted by corporate interests over the public interest is unacceptable. We challenge the propriety and equity of corporate welfare that comes in the form of tax breaks, subsidies, payments, grants, bailouts, giveaways, unenforced laws and regulations; and in historic, continuing access to our vast public resources, including the airwaves, millions of acres of land, forests, mineral resources, intellectual property rights, and government-created research.

2. We support strong national standards for labor rights and the environment so that corporations can no longer force states and cities into a brutal competition for jobs at any cost. Legal doctrines must be continually revised in recognition of the changing needs of an active, democratic citizenry. Huge multinational corporations are artificial creations, not natural persons uniquely sheltered under constitutional protections. We support local and state government attempts to define corporations and to prevent them from exercising democratic rights that are uniquely possessed by the citizens of the United States.


D. Livable Income

1. We call for a universal basic income (sometimes called a guaranteed income, negative income tax, citizen's income, or citizen dividend). This would go to every adult regardless of health, employment, or marital status, in order to minimize government bureaucracy and intrusiveness into people's lives. The amount should be sufficient so that anyone who is unemployed can afford basic food and shelter. State or local governments should supplement that amount from local revenues where the cost of living is high.

2. Job banks and other innovative training and employment programs which bring together the private and public sectors must become federal, state and local priorities. People who are unable to find decent work in the private sector should have options through publicly funded opportunities. Workforce development programs must aim at moving people out of poverty.

3. The growing inequities in income and wealth between rich and poor; unprecedented discrepancies in salary and benefits between corporate top executives and line workers; loss of the "American dream" by the young and middle-class - each is a symptom of decisions made by policy-makers far removed from the concerns of ordinary workers trying to keep up.

4. A clear living wage standard should serve as a foundation for trade between nations, and a "floor" of guaranteed wage protections and workers' rights should be negotiated in future trade agreements. The United States should take the lead on this front - and not allow destructive, predatory corporate practices under the guise of "free" international trade.


E. True Cost Pricing and Tax Fairness


F. Community Economic Involvement

1. Locally owned small businesses, which are more accessible to community concerns.

2. Local production and consumption where possible.

3. Incentives for cooperative enterprises, such as consumer co-ops, credit unions, incubators, micro-loan funds, local currencies, and other institutions that help communities develop economic projects.

4. Allowing municipalities to approve or disapprove large economic projects case-by-case based on environmental impacts, local ownership, community reinvestment, wage levels, and working conditions.

5. Allowing communities to set environmental, human rights, health and safety standards higher than federal or state minimums.

6. A national program to:

invest in the commons;

to rebuild the infrastructure of communities;

repair and improve transportation lines between cities, and;

protect and restore the environment.

A federal capital budget should be put in place and applied in a process that assesses federal spending as capital investment.

7. Applying direct democracy through town meetings, which express a community's economic wishes directly to local institutions and organizations.


G. Small Business and the Self-Employed

1. Government should reduce unnecessary restrictions, fees, and bureaucracy. In particular, the Paper Simplification Act should be seen as a way to benefit small business, and it should be improved in response to the needs of small businesses and the self-employed.

2. Health insurance premiums paid by the self-employed should be fully deductible.

3. State and local government should encourage businesses that benefit the community especially. Economic development initiatives should include citizen and community input. The type and size of businesses that are given incentives (tax, loans, bonds, etc.) should be the result of local community participation.

4. Pension funds (the result of workers' investments) should be examined as additional sources of capital for small business. [See section J. Pension Reform on page 67 in this chapter]

5. Insurance costs should be brought down by means of active engagement with the insurance industry. Insurance pools need to be expanded.

6. One-stop offices should be established by government to assist individuals who want to change careers or go into business for the first time.

7. Home-based and neighborhood-based businesses should be assisted by forward-looking planning, not hurt by out-of-date zoning ordinances. Telecommuting and home offices should be aided, not hindered, by government.


H. Work and Job Creation

To begin a transition to a system providing sustainable livelihood, we support:

1. creating alternative, low-consumption communities and living arrangements, including a reinvigorated sustainable homesteading movement in rural areas and voluntary shared housing in urban areas.

2. Universal health care requiring coverage for all.

3. The creating and spreading local currencies and barter systems.

4. Subsidizing technological development of consumer items that would contribute toward economic autonomy, such as renewable energy devices.

5. Establishing local non-profit development corporations.

6. Providing people with information about alternatives to jobs.
Creating Jobs

For creating jobs we propose:

7. Reducing taxes on labor. This will make labor more competitive with energy and capital investment.

8. Solidarity with unions and workers fighting the practice of contracting out tasks to part-time workers in order to avoid paying benefits and to break up unions.

9. Adopting a reduced-hour (30-35 hours) work week as a standard. This could translate into as many as 26 million new jobs.

10. Subsidizing renewable energy sources, which directly employ 2 to 5 times as many people for every unit of electricity generated as fossil or nuclear sources yet are cost competitive. Also, retrofit existing buildings for energy conservation and build non-polluting, low impact transportation systems.

11. Supporting small business by reducing tax, fee and bureaucratic burdens. The majority of new jobs today are created by small businesses. This would cut their failure rate and help them create more jobs.

12. Opposing the trend toward "bundling" of contracts that minimizes opportunity for small, minority-owned, and women-owned businesses.

13. Reducing consumption to minimize outsourcing - the exportation of jobs to other countries - thus reducing the relative price of using U.S. workers.

I'm a bit busy right now, but later I'll have fun dissecting some things in this I see as questionable. Get ready, Kenny.

Far, far, far too much to possibly get into all at once.

Pssst... there are only 8 million people who are unemployed.

Not only that, but reducing hours also means that the workers will get paid less. Aren't they all for a "living wage"?

If we had a bigger problem with unemployment, our policies on immigration would be different (cf. Australia).

That was the most questionable proposal I read in that whole thing.

Just show up at your local City council meeting and voice your opinion. The problem is most people don't participate in local government.



What does this mean?? You can walk in a bartender and walk out a dentist??



Businesses are not good ideas to have in neighborhoods for a few reasons. For example, if your neighbor is a tax accountant, would you want all the traffic going up and down your road during tax season. Not to mention parking problems. Safety plays a big part hear as to why businesses are not located in housing districts. Another problem is delivery trucks in neighborhoods.

Obviously, the living wage would be applied to a 30-35 hour week! In France, they have a 35 hour week and they all make a living. This isn't rocket science. Sometimes I'm amazed at the questions that are posed to me.

And Zutmon, are you really making an issue of a surplus of new jobs?

Anyway, my 8 hours of sitting at the front desk are up. See ya tomorrow.

Yes because you aren't really creating new jobs. You are just shifting and relocating the same job into multiple parts. Its the same amount of work now just done by more people; which increases the number of employess which increases the costs for companies. But your not for companies to make profits so what do you care anyway.

Let's see some stats on unemployment, average yearly wage, etc from good ol' France if it's such a great system.

Now this paragraph is absolutely hilarious.
Amidst a 50 pararaph litany explaining how the government is going to control every aspect of the economy, they say they want to minimize government bureaucracy. Absolutely mind-numbingly hilarious.

Roll out all the euphemisms you want, Kenny, it's just platform for a socialist welfare state, which, in a country of 300 million people, is quite ridiculous.

that doesnt count underemployed, or those who have stopped recieving unemployment checks because they've been out of work so long or those who have given up hope and stopped looking for work - thus they are not counted in this "unemployment" group either.

the numbers are wayyy decieving.

It does not say the government is not going to control every aspect of the economy. There are no euphemisms. The Green model is one of libertarian socialism, which is against large concentrations of wealth and power. Big government and big business have proven historically to be inefficient and often tyrannical. The Green model would bring the center power back to the local level. Its not for a social welfare state of 300 million people. The economy is a central focus of our lives, so when the economy becomes community-based, we will naturally become directly involved in our comunnities, just as people once were. This doesn't mean we become sheltered from the world, because the age of global communication is not going to go away. What Greens would do is a create a world (it is a worldwide party/movement, after all) of inter-dependent communities.

Hey, the world will probably end in a nuclear holocaust, but I'm happy to at least be on the right side of history.

You're right. I'm not for companies to make a profit. We should only work for what we need and then have fun with the rest of our time and energy.

France's unemployment rate is something like 8,9,10%, a bit higher than ours'. But like macjunkie mentioned, our unemployment figures are artificially low. Besides, last time I checked, the Greens do not have power in France. President Chirac is a conservative nationalist. And France has plenty of rich elites. So my point was not to hold France up as a model. However, I remember hearing that French workers are more productive than American workers in terms of work per hour.

This is all I could find offhand:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/ ... i_79179314

Interesting stuff, thanks

Hell, I'm all for less work and more play!

I wanna work 4 ten hour shifts. That would rule.

I used to do 24-hour shifts at a group home for mentally challanged youth. It seemed like a great idea at the time, but it ripped me to shreds and then poured lemon juice in all the wounds.

Well, shit, its working.

Interesting article. I don't think anyone has a problem with striving to work less , but I don't like the idea of forcing it upon companies.